Central Vigilance Commission

Central Vigilance Comission
Administrative Law

1. PRESENTATION ON CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE LAW I BY: VISHAL SHRIVASTAVA VI SEMESTER B.A. LL.B(Hons.) NIRMA UNIVERSITY

2. HISTORY Central Vigilance Commission  ( CVC ) is an apex Indian governmental body created in 1964 to address governmental corruption. It has the status of an autonomous body, free of control from any executive authority, charged with monitoring all vigilance  activity under the Central Government of India, and advising various authorities in central Government organizations in planning, executing, reviewing and reforming their vigilance work . It was set up by the Government of India in February, 1964 on the recommendations of the  Committee on Prevention of Corruption , headed by Shri K. Santhanam, to advise and guide Central Government agencies in the field of vigilance. The Annual Report of the CVC not only gives the details of the work done by it but also brings out the system failures which leads to corruption in various Departments/ Organisations , system improvements, various preventive measures and cases in which the Commission's advises were ignored etc . The current Central Vigilance Commissioner is  Pradeep Kumar, and the Vigilance Commissioners are R Sri Kumar and J M Garg

3. ROLE OF CVC The CVC is not an investigating agency, and works through either the CBI or through the Departmental Chief Vigilance Officers . The only investigation carried out by the CVC is that of examining Civil Works of the Government which is done through the Chief Technical Officer . Corruption investigations against government officials can proceed only after the government permits them. The CVC publishes a list of cases where permissions are pending, some of which may be more than a year old . The Ordinance of 1998 conferred statutory status to the CVC and the powers to exercise superintendence over functioning of the Delhi Special Police Establishment, and also to review the progress of the investigations pertaining to alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 conducted by them. In 1998 the Government introduced the CVC Bill in the Lok Sabha in order to replace the Ordinance, though it was not successful. The Bill was re-introduced in 1999 and remained with the Parliament till September 2003, when it became an Act after being duly passed in both the Houses of Parliament. The CVC has also been publishing a list of corrupt government officials against which it has recommended punitive action .

4. APPOINTMENT OF CVC The Central Vigilance Commissioner and the Vigilance Commissioners are appointed by the President after obtaining the recommendation of a Committee consisting of: The Prime Minister — Chairperson The Home Minister — Member. The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha — Member

5. REMOVAL The Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner can be removed from his office only by order of the President on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the President, has, on inquiry, reported that the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be, ought to be removed. The President may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference. The President may, by order, remove from office the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner if the Central Vigilance Commissioner or such Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be: is adjudged an insolvent; or has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the Central Government, involves moral turpitude; or engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or is, in the opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as a Central Vigilance Commissioner or a Vigilance Commissioner (As per CVC Act, 2003)

6. ORGANISATION The CVC is headed by a Central Vigilance Commissioner who is assisted by two Vigilance Commissioners. [1] The Central Vigilance Commission has its own Secretariat, Chief Technical Examiners' Wing (CTE) and a wing of Commissioners for Departmental Inquiries (CDI). As on 21 March 2012, CVC has a staff strength of 257 against sanctioned strength of 299 (including the post of CVC and 2 VCs)

7. LIMITATIONS OF CVC CVC is only an advisory body. Central Government Departments are free to either accept or reject CVC's advice in corruption cases . CVC does not have adequate resources compared with number of complaints that it receives. It is a very small set up with a sanctioned staff strength of 299.Whereas , it is supposed to check corruption in more than 1500 central government departments and ministries . CVC cannot direct CBI to initiate inquiries against any officer of the level of Joint Secretary and above on its own. Such a permission has to be obtained from the concerned department. CVC does not have powers to register criminal case. It deals only with vigilance or disciplinary cases . CVC has supervisory powers over CBI. However, CVC does not have the power to call for any file from CBI or to direct CBI to investigate any case in a particular manner. CBI is under administrative control of Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT). Which means that, the powers to appoint, transfer, suspend CBI officers lie with DoPT . Appointments to CVC are indirectly under the control of  Govt of India, though the leader of the Opposition (in Lok Sabha) is a member of the Committee to select CVC and VCs. But the Committee considers candidates put up before it. These candidates are decided by the Government . As a result, although CVC is relatively independent in its functioning, it has neither resources nor powers to inquire and take action on complaints of corruption that may act as an effective deterrence against corruption

8. Centre For Pil & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr PJ Thomas was appointed as the Chief Vigilance Commissioner in September 2010, on the recommendation of a High Powered Committee (HPC) headed by the Prime Minister of India. The selection of the new CVC was marked by controversies, after Sushma Swaraj, who was part of three-member selection committee, objected to the choice of Thomas, citing the pending chargesheet against him. A public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court of India by Centre for Public Interest Litigation and India Rejuvenation Initiative . On March 3, 2011, the Supreme Court quashed the appointment of Thomas as the Chief Vigilance Commissioner, noting that the HPC did not consider the relevant materials on the pending  chargesheet.Subsequently , Mr Thomas resigned.

9. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION A few years after the murder of IIT Kanpur alumnus NHAI engineer Satyendra Dubey , the CVC launched an initiative to protect whistleblowers. However, this program has been criticized by ex-Chief Justice of India R.C. Lahoti as being ineffective. He said that he had on previous occasions through his NGO India Rejuvenation Initiative, tried to draw the attention of high officials in the CVC to the unsatisfactory manner of its functioning, but with no results